a listing of the proposed SFIS data elements with the data construct, 

definition, cross-walk to existing data elements, and explanation for why 

each data element is needed in the 511R, in order to facilitate review by 

Components and Agencies. 

b. Dale Yeakel, of KGS, supporting DLMSO, indicated that approximately 33% of 

current logistics business transactions are DLMS. He indicated that it is projected 

that by the year 2015, 80-90% of all logistics business transactions will be DLMS. 

ACTION: Dan Martin, DFAS, will provide an estimate concerning when DFAS 

non-DLMS systems will be sunsetting and their related status by 13 December 

2008. 

2. Inter-Service Obligation. 

a. Ronnie Daniels (Army) was to determine the status of Draft PDC 266 which was 

proposed as a funds availability interface (rather than an inter-service obligation 

transaction). Army is currently holding meetings toward revising Draft PDC 266 

for staffing. Bob Hammond indicated that this item will remain open. 

3. DLMS MILSBILLS Manual Updates. 

a. Susan Scott (USAF) drafted a rough PDC for use of fund code XP for noninterfund billing, prior to her accepting another position and leaving the Finance 

PRC. Ellen Hilert, DLMSO, previously suggested a rework of the PDC to have 

the edit for authorized use of Fund Code XP at DAASC when the order processes 

based upon a combination of rules (e.g. allowing EMALL SP5200 purchase card 

orders to process with XP), Service/Agency code, and pre-determined DoDAAC 

series. Each Service was to verify feasibility of this approach and was to identify 

all DODAAC criteria that should be authorized to use Fund Code XP, along with 

justifications. The FPRC members indicated that there were no current problems 

concerning use Fund Code XP, and agreed to close this item. 

4. DLA (S9M) Billings on Medical Service Contracts Via Interfund. 

a. It was reported that DLA was billing via the Interfund for maintenance contracts, 

which does not allow for ensuring that receiving reports are in hand prior to 

making progress payments. Susan Eldridge, DLA, indicated that after further 

investigation this problem is no longer occurring. Based on this information, the 

FPRC agreed to close this item. 

5. FAA RIC PROBLEM. 

a. Some FAA billings have RIC 570 vice RIC G69. Billie Davis, FAA, indicates that 

FAA is sending RIC G69. An FAA RIC Document was provided, which indicates 

that the correct RIC of G69 is being provided by FAA in the Detailed Bill but that 

GSA, who submits the bills for FAA, is entering the incorrect RIC of 570 in the 

Summary Bill. Shirley Reed, Air Force, indicated that it looks like the Treasury 

Code is being picked up erroneously. ACTION: Reggie Norwood, GSA, will 

research this problem provide status by 30 January 2009. 

6. MILS Migration Status 
a. Mark Johnson, Navy, was to research why Navy ERP is not planning to use the 

812R Logistics Bill Adjustment Request or the 812L Logistics Bill Adjustment 

Reply. Mark Johnson indicated that the Navy is looking into the efforts required 

to incorporate the 812R and 812L into their system. ACTION: Mark Johnson, 

will determine the current status of the Navy’s effort to incorporate the 812R and 

812L into their ERP and provide status by 1 December 2008. 

7. Fund Code Validation on FMS Requisitions. 

a. ADC 20, which has been incorporated into Chapter 9 of MISBILLS, specifies 

mandatory use rules for the Fund Code. Subsequent to implementation, DAASC 

excluded FMS from the logic due to reported problems with Army and Air Force 

transactions. The Army scenario involves requisitions used by FMS customers to 

purchase major end items. Kathleen Heikel, Army, reports that changes were 

made to the Army Centralized Integrated System for International Logistics to 

comply with ADC 20. The Air Force scenario was described as a prerequisition 

inquiry from the ILCO to obtain the correct source of supply from DAASC. 

DLMSO requested that the Air Force document this process; however, since this 

is not an actual requisition a waiver for ADC 20 is not required. The Air Force 

process is as follows: 

i. DAASC and Air Force have had an agreement for approximately 20 years 

where the Air Force Security Assistance Management Information System 

(SAMIS) sends transactions/inquiries to DAASC (pre-requisition) to 

search for a Source of Supply (SOS) when there is no SOS listed in the 

Air Force catalog. SAMIS transmits these transactions to DAASC (RIC 

SGA) with a blank fund code because SAMIS is unable to assign a fund 

code when the SOS is unknown. DAASC then searches to identify a SOS. 

If successful, DAASC returns the transaction with the SOS identified; if 

they are unsuccessful, DAASC also returns the transaction, but with a 

notation that they could not find a SOS. Either way, these types of 

transactions are not requisitions processed by DAASC. For the 

successfully identified SOS, SAMIS assigns a fund code based on the SOS 

and submits a requisition; if not successful, the document number is 

researched for possible further action. ACTION: DAASC will remove the 

exception for FMS fund code edit and implement a procedure to 

accommodate the Air Force pre-requisition inquiry. 

8. Air Force Billing Problems Resulting from Partial Shipments. 

a. This issue came up in the Supply PRC, but it also has financial implications. ADC 

247 provides some background. Since DLA Distribution Standard System (DSS) 

confirms based on partial shipments, and DLA Enterprise Business System (EBS) 

bills based on these confirmations, (ARO) vice the material release order (A5_), 

the possibility exists that some bills will appear as duplicate billings. These bills 

don't contain suffixes on the document numbers, and the Air Force finance system 

considers the same document number with the same quantity to be a duplicate. 

This causes manual work, and increased the bill processing charge from DFAS to 

the Services. Air Force indicates that this is a problem for them, while Army and 

Navy indicate that it is not a problem for them. Some possible solutions identified 
include: (1) Fix EBS not to bill until the shipment is complete; (2) Change DFAS 

systems to accommodate partial billings by accumulating the billed dollar 

amount, so that bills based upon partial shipments are not rejected unless the 

dollar total exceeds the amount obligated. (3) In DLMS, add the TCN to the bill 

or add a partial shipment indicator for future use. The inclusion of the TCN in the 

bill under DLMS is included in ADC 290; however, this is a long term solution. 

Susan Eldridge, DLA, indicated that it is not feasible to modify EBS in the near 

term to correct this problem. Shirley Reed, Air Force, will review the process the 

Army has taken to address this issue through discussions with Ronnie Daniels, 

Army. ACTION: Shirley Reed, Air Force will talk with Ronnie Daniels, Army, 

regarding the Army process, and will look at the Air Force edit to determine if the 

Air Force edit can be modified to resolve this problem. Subsequent to the 

meeting, DLMSO recommended that AF provide a DLMS Change proposal to 

establish DoD rules for billing of partial shipments if internal AF solution is not 

acceptable and/or volume of billing associated with partial supply actions is 

shown to be a significant expense to the Service resulting from DFAS charges for 

processing of electronic separate bills for each partial action.She will provide 

status by 15 January 2009.

9. GSA-Directed Shipments Lost at DLA-Operated Consolidation and 

Containerization Point (CCP). 

a. GSA directs vendor shipment to customers through the DLA CCPs. If material is 

lost and GSA has transporter proof of delivery (TPD) from the vendor neither the 

vendor nor GSA will reimburse the customer. DLA has no policy/process to 

provide credit for CCP losses based upon submission of a Supply Discrepancy 

Report (SDR) to DLA. GSA does not accept responsibility for CCP losses. Ellen 

Hilert, DLMSO, suggested that the best way for the credit to occur is to have 

GSA reimburse the customer and then have DLA reimburse GSA. GSA would 

bill DLA for the customer’s credits. Buz Sawyer, DLA, indicated that this would 

have to be negotiated between GSA and DLA. The volume of these types of lost 

items is small, but users get upset when they don’t get credit. Ellen Hilert, 

DLMSO, will establish a proposed DLMS change for SDR processing and work 

with Buz Sawyer and Susan Eldridge, DLA, to document the financial 

procedures. This will also need to be reviewed by Reggie Norwood, GSA. Ellen 

Hilert of DLMSO is still working this effort. The action will remain open. 

10. DLMS Training 

a. DLMS Financial Training, Module 5. Bob Hammond, DLMSO, provided the 

DLMS Financial training presentation to the Finance PRC group. 

b. 810L Training. Bob Hammond, DLMSO, provided training on the 810L 

Logistics Bill. During the training Bob Hammond pointed out an error at 2/ 

LQ01/310 of the 810L, and indicated that it is important to read the DLMS notes 

carefully. In this instance, the DLMS note for qualifier DG (fund code) 

incorrectly indicates that this qualifier cannot be used when the summary record 

1/BIG07/020 identifies an Interfund bill. ACTION: Bob Hammond, DLMSO, 
will develop a DLMS PDC/ADC by 30 December 2008 to remove the incorrect 

note from the 810L. 

Enclosure